Ethno-Statal Speculations

Suffrage should be granted to married fathers and mothers with children, who are not social misfits. For these have shown responsibility, have rendered service to the community by perpetuating its lineage, and have a stake in its future.

Perhaps suffrage should be proportional to the number of children raised.

Suffrage should be granted to soldiers and veterans. For these have shown responsibility, have shown thumos, and have rendered service to the community by risking their lives for its perpetuity.

A House of Fathers and Mothers, and a House of Soldiers, could hold legislative powers together.

The classroom should be exclusively reserved for teaching how to read and write. The post-primary classroom is hereby abolished as a historic mistake, suitable only for making human beings into overgrown gerbils. (Come to think of it, bug or feature?)

Education should be carefully personalized according to the abilities and interests of each individual. Emphasis should be on the development of skills, training (singing, playing instruments, art, trades . . .), and, if appropriate to the child’s abilities, cultural classics and science. Education should take place through long-term mentor-pupil relationships and group activities. (And, again, not a dozen annually-changing classes with annually-changing teachers.) All children however must learn right values.

The Constitution will be a biocentric founding text and way of life, aiming to the genetic and cultural flourishing of the European peoples and Western civilization. All laws or government actions contrary to the European peoples’ ethno-genetic interests and harmony with nature, including environmentally unsustainable consumerism, will be unconstitutional.

The Constitution will be protected by a European Order, serving as a military-spiritual elite. Members of the European Order engage in military and police service, undertake daily philosophical exercises, and have a systematic education in cultural classics and biological science, from Plato to Darwin, and beyond.

The judiciary, which will be empowered to strike down unconstitutional actions, will be made up exclusively of former officers of the European Order. These must have shown excellence in their military or police service (ideally having risked their life for their nation and Europe), philosophical practice, and cultural and scientific education.

Perhaps the Head of State should be the head of the European Order, choosing his successor by adoption and/or council, as did the Roman Empire at its height, as has the Papacy for millennia. The Head of State’s powers are purely executive, implementing the laws of the House of Fathers and Mothers and the House of Soldiers, all constrained by the Constitution as interpreted by the judiciary.

Those who have lawfully slain an enemy of Europe in battle will be eligible for “European citizenship,” that is to say, will be treated as a full citizen of every European and Western State (isopoliteia).

Pornography will be banned.

Sexual advertisements, most forms of pop music, and indeed all memes which do not beautify the public space, and do not elevate the souls of those who live in that public space, will be banned from the public space. The public space is a sacred space.

There is no substitute for practice. I have tasted Plato’s Republic in the Zen temple and the Spartan way of life on the tatami. A higher, European way of life awaits us, for all our people, but first we must cultivate that way of life in each of us. We must plant and carefully tend to fine seeds now, so that in the long decades ahead, the most beautiful flowers will one day bloom.

Sarcasm aside, what would those major differences be in regards to how an imaginary future racist White etno-state would operate and the operation of the very real version of a racist ethno-state run by Koreans ?

“The classroom should be exclusively reserved for teaching how to read and write.”

It is not enough merely to be able to communicate, i.e. read and write, one must also be able to communicate in rigorous logic. Learning mathematics (though not in the way it is taught now) develops that ability and has practical value in its own right, so should be included here.

“The post-primary classroom is hereby abolished as a historic mistake, … Education should take place through long-term mentor-pupil relationships and group activities.”

The efficiency of classrooms really can’t be denied: one teacher-hour of lecture produces dozens of student-hours of learning. Indeed, if classrooms were not so efficient in terms of quantity we would not be complaining about indoctrination at universities so much. Efficiency, though, is always valuable and even more so in a future nascent ethnostate where large families are encouraged and all those children are supposed to be mentored by a generation likely to have had its ranks thinned by war, and even if not will have its hands quite full running the other facets of society.

The potential for gerbilization today stems from two factors. First, a classroom situation means that you have one teacher, possibly with an ideological agenda, and a bunch of 14-year-olds who have no knowledge base from which to challenge anything the teacher might say. Second, they have an incentive not to rock the boat by making such challenges since their future livelihood could be on the line. Both of these problems can be solved by having (some or all of) the students’ mentors in the classroom at the same time. It’s one thing to try to push propaganda on children who don’t know any better, but another thing to do the same to 40-year-olds who have seen a thing or two and know enough about the subject to become mentors in the first place. Since the mentors’ livelihoods are not at stake they risk virtually nothing by calling out the teacher on any and all nonsense he might spout.

There is also the simple fact that not everyone has the ability to teach or mentor well, which will conflict with parents’ natural desires to secure the best mentors for their children. This way the best teacher can do the teaching for many students at once, so we get efficiency and quality, but without the opportunity for indoctrination. Furthermore, in this system the students get to see what rational debate between experts looks like which today’s system cannot provide and which we sorely need. Of course this can all be complemented by one-on-one instruction as needed for each individual by his mentor.

“Perhaps suffrage should be proportional to the number of children raised.”</i/

Oh, yes Mr. Durocher, we definitely need more inhabitants on this lonely planet!
Fortunately your native France can count on their African and Arab immigrants to enhance the voting balance the way you propose.

Ah, they didn’t“have shown excellence in their military or police service (ideally having risked their life for their nation and Europe)” ?

No problem, Mr. Durocher.

First, many Senegalais fought with your army against those ugly Aryans in WWII to” lawfully slain an enemy of Europe”
Second, contemporary Paris is abundant of Arab policemen.

I like the sound of this. It sounds like a return to the so-called “natural order” – a vague term, but it will have to do for the moment.
Clearly the human capacity for Thumos is destroyed by over-mechanisation, whether the society is communist or capitalist. And by overpopulation. And by too much material comfort. And by lots of things! Feminisation, mass immigration – the list is endless.
I have been listening to a chat (on youtube) between Greg Johnson and Guillaume Durocher, recorded about 18 months ago, about “Living as a Dissident”. It soon becomes apparent that by that date (June 2016), they are both querying whether EthnoNationalists actually are Dissidents (i.e. a minority who “sit apart” from the herd).
Surely most people of any human ethnic group, think exactly as EthnoNationalists do?
Of course “Dissident” does imply majority support against any form of Tyranny – but it is a bit of a weasel word.
Whilst the intelligentsia think it is cool to be Dissident, most people do not think it is cool at all. They can’t afford to rock any boats. So whilst it might be worth telling intellectuals, students, “Occupy”, etc., that the Alt Right are brave and noble “Dissidents”, I am not sure it would work with anyone else.
Also, I feel it is bad for morale. Dissidents tend to get sent to the Gulags or whatever.
As an EthnoNationalist, I now feel that I prefer to be called a Reactionary, or a Counter-Revolutionary. These are a form of Dissidence, it is true – but an unmistakably NON P.C. form, I feel. So the exact terminology could matter quite a bit.
It is confusing, because Revolutionaries have been in power for so long in the First World (both Soviet and Capitalist), that normal people like us no longer see them as Revolutionaries – because they rule the roost. Yet they were and still are Revolutionaries – THEY are the Dissidents against the natural order, with their cries of “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity”, “Feed The World”, “No Borders”, etc. etc.
I found the Wiki article on “Reactionary” very helpful. It has several examples of “Reactionaries” which seem to me to fit the bill for latter-day White Nationalists, who are not your typical “Dissident”. Boris Pasternak e.g., was seen as a Reactionary by the Soviets, and a Dissident by the West. In fact, he was a Reactionary Dissident – a Counter-Revolutionary Dissident, as opposed to the Bolsheviki, who were Revolutionary Dissidents.
Towards the end of the article, a person called Corey Robin is mentioned. He is clearly an implacable enemy of conservative reactionaries, and has written a book purporting to take them apart, called “The Reactionary Mind: Conservatism from Edmund Burke to Sarah Palin” (2011). I have not read the book, though I have no doubt it contains a lot of useful pointers TOWARDS being Reactionary for those that way inclined.
But the title alone has made my mind up for me: I definitely want to be a Reactionary Dissident, not a Revolutionary Dissident. And there is clearly a world of difference between the two.

Yes, in a nutshell.
I see that Richard Spencer seems to be thinking about Separate Development – i.e. Separate States or Separate Nations for Whites.
I suppose this is because things have got so tangled that it is impossible to unravel them and get back to an orderly system such as the one you described in your article.
It seems like the only possible solution is to start afresh, especially as our children have been mis-educated for so long.
As you say, “All children however must learn right values.” It has to start at primary level – and how can that happen without Separate Development?
Luckily in White Nations, Whites still own most of the land in rural areas. This is crucial – and rural life is the one thing that is still relatively pristine. So Whites in cities ought to move out to rural areas asap, abandoning their jobs and trying to live off the land.
A French website called “Francais de Souche” (fdesouche) posted a link last July to another French website called “Valeurs Actuelles”. The linked article was confined to one example of native French people moving out of cities into rural areas, Kruth in Alsace. But other Europeans are flocking to abandoned villages in France and Spain and Italy and reviving them, because their own villages are full (largely of white people who have fled the cities). So there is some hope outside the cities, in Europe – and probably in the USA too.https://www.valeursactuelles.com/societe/le-village-de-kruth-la-divine-surprise-86932

Of course our great cities should not be abandoned to the invaders. But if we could rally ourselves properly in a place of refuge for Whites Only, we could recapture our cities from that position of strength. At the moment our strength is dissipated and dispersed, and also it is sapped every time we go outside if we live in a city!

Mostly agree with the above, but I am extremely skeptical (to say the least) of giving the judiciary and the proposed European Order the authority to strike down “unconstitutional” measures. Generally speaking, high IQ elites tend towards liberal cosmopolitanism and internationalism, at least in the modern world. This is true even for someone like General Mattis, who comes the closest in modern U.S. military history to representing a kind of Aryan Warrior Ideal. Opposition to mass immigration, multiculturalism, social liberalism, “free” trade etc….has come primarily from the white proletariat, and *not* from elite white men in the upper echelons of the military.

In fact, I seriously doubt that any of the above harmful policies would have been instituted if they had been subject to a simple democratic referendum as the only means to pass them, even with nonwhites and non-married whites voting. Many on the Right have an inherent suspicion of direct democracy, but you can’t argue with the reality that elite institutions have proven much more susceptible to subversion than the unwashed masses.

Hello Mr. Pepe. You raise an good point. Perhaps the democratic element should be direct? I would hope the filter of volunteering for elite military service would make the judiciary more spirited than our usual elites.